Oct. 11, 2013

Vance Phillips

Written by

Sean O’Sullivan

The News Journal

A judge ordered attorneys for the woman who brought a sexual assault case against Sussex County Councilman Vance Phillips to keep medical and financial documents confidential, including records that show he was a crime victim.

Attorneys for Katelynn Dunlap, who filed a civil lawsuit against Phillips seeking unspecified damages, had opposed the secrecy measure as unnecessary for a personal injury case and suggested it was an effort to silence her or make the litigation more difficult for her.

During the hour-long hearing, that neither Phillips nor Dunlap attended, both sides accused the other of trying the case in the press.

Dunlap, 20, a former Republican Party campaign staffer, filed a 17-page civil suit against Phillips in May, describing him as a sexual predator and accusing him of rape, assault, unlawful sexual contact, sexual harassment, unlawful imprisonment, sexual extortion and offensive touching between May and June 2011.

The suit alleges that Phillips forced sex on several occasions and in one encounter at a hotel bound, blindfolded and whipped Dunlap, then 18. Dunlap charges that Phillips then forced her silence about the assaults by threatening to ruin her budding public service career if she spoke out.

Phillips has denied the accusations and his attorneys have accused Dunlap of waging a campaign to embarrass Phillips.

At the outset, Phillips attorney Melissa Donimirski told the Kent County Superior Court Commissioner Andrea Freud that the confidentiality order was needed to prevent Dunlap from getting Phillips’ private financial information during the discovery process “and going to the press with it.”

Dunlap’s attorneys responded that the secrecy is “unnecessary and inappropriate” in this case and that Phillips’ prior conduct, and the conduct of his criminal defense attorney, “openly disparaging our client,” argues in favor of a “full and open” discovery process.

In court, Dunlap attorney B. Brian Brittingham said Phillips and his attorney “went to the press first” and they viewed Phillips’ demand for a confidentiality order as an attempt to place a gag order on Dunlap.

(Page 2 of 2)

Shortly after Dunlap’s lawsuit was filed, Phillips’ attorney Joe Hurley said the civil action was “the same garbage” as an anonymous letter that had been circulated last fall about Phillips. “It’s the same rumor on steroids,” he said in May.

Phillips has also called the suit, “the most ridiculous thing I have ever read” and said he was “hoping to discern the motivation of the plaintiff so I may somehow help them with their problems.”

Brittingham conceded in court that some matters, like business and financial details, should be kept off the public record. Dunlap has agreed to that as well as a separate deal with the Delaware Attorney General’s office to keep private the information that office will be providing.

Accusations related to Phillips and Dunlap were investigated by the state but no charges were filed.

The confidentiality order would not bar Dunlap or her attorneys from seeing the information, it would prohibit them from disclosing it. Each side could also raise objections with the judge if they felt the other side was improperly claiming confidentiality.

Brittingham told the court Thursday that the confidentiality order as drafted by Phillips was “far too broad” because it also required other “non public information,” to be covered, which was not defined.

Brittingham said this seemed like an effort to throw hurdles in front of Dunlap and force her to go to court constantly during discovery, and while common in business matters, it was not common in personal injury cases.

Freud then ruled that Dunlap would not be harmed by a confidentiality order, and granted Phillips’ motion.